Veeck* as in Wreck, Vick as in...

I haven't written anything on the Michael Vick case because it all seemed so obvious. What he involved himself in is just so awful, disgusting and offensive that words don't begin to condemn it. What he did, and has admitted to, personally killing and torturing dogs for sport dismisses him from civilized society. That said, it is interesting that the reaction to Vick's transgressions, seems much more angry and passionate than if he had actually sexually assaulted a human being. I recently asked a young woman why she thought that was. Her answer was as short, as it was insightful. "Dogs don't lie!" she said.

(*Bill Veeck owned the Chicago White Socks (and other teams) and was famous for putting a midget up to the plate to get a walk. It worked. He a wrote a book called Veeck as in Wreck. I went to college with his son.)

This is an interesting thought. There may be arguments about the culpability of adult human beings, but there is never an argument about the culpability of children or animals.

It's interesting to compare the Michael Vick situation to the Kobe Bryant rape case a few years ago. If I remember correctly, Kobe never even went to trial. After the 19-year old woman's name was leaked, the intense pressure, name-calling and death threats were enough that she stopped pursuing the prosecution.

I have no opinion as to whether or not Kobe was guilty, but what his accuser was subjected to is the exact reason why most victims of sexual assault never file charges.

No. What passes for "insight" is that when human beings are involved, there is always the chance that the accuser is lying and/or making the charge for less than heroic reasons.

Think the Duke Lacrosse Team "Rape" case."Women lie so they deserve to be raped? This passes for insight?"

No one. NO ONE, has said that because the accuser in that case lied, she deserves to be raped. (Prosecuted maybe. But not raped.)

However, plenty of well-educated college professors at Duke were willing to believe the accuser's fantastic story because it fit with their ideological view that white males as a group abuse and oppress women and minorities. The facts be damned. Since the narrative of white male oppression folded so neatly into their world view, they were willing to believe the accused were guilty, when they were in fact innocent.

In Kobe Bryant's case, you had two adults telling two different stories. Both plausible. He had reason to lie. So did she.

But "anonymous" makes a fair point. What Kobe Bryant's accuser was subjected to in the press is certainly a reason why many victims sexual assault don't file charges.

When it comes to dogs being beaten, electrocuted and hung, well, we don't have to take their word for it.

As anon said, there is never an argument about the culpablity of children or animals. Grown-ups, however, even those who are victimized have to look at their own behavior and actions to see if they contributed to their victimization.